Hot or Cold?

The idea that the medium is the message isn’t really all that new. When we think about it, and as we have discussed in previous chapters of the book, location and environment can be as important to the message as the content of the message itself. Those mediums that engage more than just the ears of the audience are likely to be more effective, because they are able to appeal to a wider audience.

This does however create a larger problem in terms of picking the speaker. In a medium like television, you now have to take into account appearance factors as well as speaking ability. When using a medium like the radio, one only had to focus on vocal quality and control. If one were using print media, then the main consideration was in organization of content for maximum interest by the reader. While my examples are in reverse order, we see that as the medium becomes more evolved technologically, more factors have to be taken into account in terms of the sender receiver relationship.

I think the problem with the cool-hot distinction is that it doesn’t apply to all. Depending on the message, or the target audience, coolness can be a detractor. A prime example in my mind is when I see TV ads soliciting donations for abused animals or starving children. The images that are displayed evoke an outraged response from me that doesn’t match the cool narrative I hear. As a result the content becomes less valid on both sides, and rather than being prodded to donate, I’m prodded to change the channel.